THE HOLY GRAIL ~ CANTOR DISPROOF
in [Math]
|
Prev: Simple permutation question
Next: INFINITE LIST OF PRIME NUMBERS BY PLACEMENT BY NEW -1TANGENT MATHEMATICS
From: Jesse F. Hughes on 2 Jun 2010 17:25 Transfer Principle <lwalke3(a)lausd.net> writes: > On Jun 1, 1:45 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi...(a)uta.fi> wrote: >> "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> writes: >> > So is there a flaw with the following? >> There's no flaw. It's just nonsense. > > Now this seems to indicate that Herc is in Case 4, which > states that Herc is so confused that he posts "nonsense" > that is "not even wrong." > > The fact that it's so hard to determine which case Cooper > is in is one reason that I might stop referring to the > cases altogether and find new ways to address his argument. > > (Then again, I don't know whether there's any way that I > can address "nonsense" that's "not even wrong.") But you *must* address it! Otherwise, how will we know whose side you're on? -- Jesse F. Hughes Baba: Spell checkers are bad. Quincy (age 7): C-H-E-K-E-R-S A-R-E B-A-D.
From: |-|ercules on 2 Jun 2010 20:52 "Transfer Principle" <lwalke3(a)lausd.net> wrote... > On Jun 1, 1:45 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi...(a)uta.fi> wrote: >> "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> writes: >> > So is there a flaw with the following? >> There's no flaw. It's just nonsense. > > Now this seems to indicate that Herc is in Case 4, which > states that Herc is so confused that he posts "nonsense" > that is "not even wrong." > > The fact that it's so hard to determine which case Cooper > is in is one reason that I might stop referring to the > cases altogether and find new ways to address his argument. > > (Then again, I don't know whether there's any way that I > can address "nonsense" that's "not even wrong.") You think the simplest computer model is nonsense? Herc
From: Sam Wormley on 2 Jun 2010 21:42 On 6/2/10 7:52 PM, |-|ercules wrote: > > You think the simplest computer model is nonsense? Especially if it doesn't model physical theory or process!
From: |-|ercules on 3 Jun 2010 02:42 "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com> wrote > A=target(P) and P=target(A) this should be assign := not equals. A:=target(P) and P:=target(A) Herc
From: Sam Wormley on 3 Jun 2010 13:03
On 6/3/10 1:40 AM, |-|ercules wrote: > HAHA NOBODY here has the requisite IQ to work out what function my > computer model is emulating. Yet you all knock > it as nonsense. Why should we listen to a guy who can't even use an alphabet set of symbols to spell his own name correctly? Turing machines are not an effective way to model scientific processes! A Turing machine is a theoretical device that manipulates symbols contained on a strip of tape. Despite its simplicity, a Turing machine can be adapted to simulate the logic of any computer algorithm, and is particularly useful in explaining the functions of a CPU inside of a computer. --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine I worked my share of tasks with Turing machines in graduate school. There more efficient ways of modeling physical reality. |